Bitcoin Forum

...

I believe it was yesterday when knowledgeable observer BitcoinNewsMagazine wrote that recent firmware updates (in Trezor and Ledger, which had always worried me...) were in many cases important after all.

One important reason is that many older wallets only allow certain amounts to be paid as fees...  Without the ability to be able to send a higher fee, our transactions now would be stuck in Purgatory for eternity.

So, I have various wallets, hardware, PC and blockchain.info.  

Diversity in wallets, JUST to be able to pay the now ever-present high fees looks like a really good idea.

I don't think there's a need for diversity, one just has to try a few and use the few ones that are really good. Personally, I only use breadwallet at the moment. It doesn't let me set a fee, but its fee calculating algorithm never let me down. If you really want to set a fee, just use Core or any of its derivatives. If you want to set a fee but don't want a full blockchain, take Electrum.

I somehow agree with you, wallets developers (as expert) should however understand more then us the importance of fees. So either allowing users to set dynamic fees or a smart enough algorithm that check the current number of unconfirmed transaction and their fees and calculate based on that.

I never keep my coins in a single wallet. They are distributed across a number of online and offline wallets. Fees was not one of my biggest considerations. Safety was my first priority, along with anonymity.

How that isn't diversity ?  "Using the few one's that are really good ?".Okay for instance,you store all your coins on a desktop wallet like Electrum and your PC gets attacked by a ransomware or by a RAT ? What you do ? Lose all your coins ? That's not a good choice.Having the coins distributed always adds a security layer.

We're talking about distributed computing here...

which hardware wallets off that feature? Trezor?

Sounds good idea to me. I don't have much btc though, but your idea seems to fit with people have large investment in bitcoin. I only have a exchange wallet and Electrum wallet which I think fit me better in terms of holding bitcoin and adjusting fees as it has this features.  Maybe if I have accumulate large amount, then I will be diversify my wallet as well.

What's more important is to choose wallets which give strong flexibility so that investors can use their coins in any way that they want.  Electrum, for example, is very good for dynamic fees.  

Wallets should give warnings, but should have full freedom in any aspects.  TREZOR is great because it's compatible with Electrum as well, and some other wallets too.

Do you mean that there's no need for more diversity? Because what you describe is that we already have diversity in Bitcoin wallets.
I would say that it couldn't hurt to have even more choices for wallets.

It depends on people preference if he do want to secure his coins on the way on diversifying it on many wallets but for me 2-3 wallets would be enough just be sure to keep all the important details keys on it and speaking about fees it wont hurt at all if you dont usually use to make transfers but if you are active enough then choose web wallets instead on hardware ones.You know what i suppose to tell or mean.

That has nothing to do with using one or one thousand wallet softwares.

If you're attacked, you're attacked. The attacker either gains control of your coins (and that's not wallet's fault, there's no known vulnerability in any of the most used wallets) or he doesn't and you can recover your coins from backups.

But I do agree that distributing coins somehow adds a bit of security. The question is, how much security does it add against having coins on the same software but distributed in different backups? And the practicality of having coins in one single software?

PS: let's not forget that we're talking about coins that we have for daily spending.


Not sure what you mean by distributed computing in this context.


Yes, this would be a better way to describe what I meant :) Some wallet software has become redundant. We're at a point in which some wallets softwares and online wallets are just rediscovering gun-powder...

currently the transaction fees and confirmation delayed we are experience nowadays call for concern and this option of having many wallet both offline an online is very logical and every one especially traders need to have many wallet in other to resolve this delay in transactions confirmation problems.

Yes its very safe to Have Number of wallets .

it provides security and also as You said We can be able to send btc with Higher fees and our amount wont be Unconfirmed for long  time .

Ya it is true that if you keep the coins in different wallets then you can be saved by lot of problems. and it is also good to keep different wallet for different use like u cannot use web wallets for gambling as they will ban your accounts

Excellent observation.  Safety is my main goal too.  Not too much BTC is any one place (I am think ahead here, hoping that my BTC will become valuable).  And to the extent I can, I try to hide my tracks w/ bitmixer.io (I like their service).

But, the ability to adjust fees has become an issue too.  Some (older?) wallets do not allow you to adjust fees.  Having a few wallets, especially that allow customizing fee amounts is "Yet Another Reason..."

This cannot be said enough. When opening up this forum there should be a video they make you watch that explains things like this. People need to secure btc for sure.

Well having multiple wallets which contains distributed amount of BTC is wise. That way, you can secure your bitcoins in case a wallet was hacked, lost or whatever. If ever you lose some, most remains. Just take note of the private keys of every single wallet you have or, surely, you will be in a lot of trouble.

Having multiple wallets is good for people who have a big amount of BTC, having a small amount is not so good at all. You might deal with several transaction fees there that may eat some of your BTC.

I'm cool with my little Mycelium phone wallet.  It lets me choose various fee options, and the "normal" one isn't too high and usually my transactions get confirmed within a couple of minutes.  But I'm not against what OROBTC is saying at all.  If you spread your bitcoin over different wallets, it sort of decreases the risk of all of them getting hacked at once (though I'm sure that could happen). 

Diversifying is smart. Throwing your private key on your front lawn and asking people to please not look at it is not diversifying. In case that didn't get through to you, blockchain.info are thieves so get your money out asap. All Web wallets aren't banks so stop treating th like they are. When your bitcoins get stolen they're gone.

Blockchain.info wallet causes more grief to new users (fees too low) than any other wallet except Multibit HD. Both should be avoided like the plaque.

Case wallet was a popular hardware wallet a year ago but the company has abandoned updating the firmware. I hope Case users got their bitcoin out because you cannot specify a fee using that wallet and fees are set very low.

I really wish Bitcoin Core had incorporated support for Trezor or Nano S by now but doubt that is going to happen.

You can set your own fee with blockchain.info if you want, you are not stuck with default fee. If someone is advanced user he/she would set custom fee.
Low fees are used because newbies would cry more about 'ridiculous blockchain.info' fees, than they are crying about long confirmation times.

I always thought that hardware bitcoin wallet are only gadgets, they are not offering anything special, you can achieve for free with software wallets.
As you brought up, hardware wallets after couple years and without proper firmware updates can be ticking bombs.

The only way you can achieve isolation of your bitcoin private keys using software wallets is to run Armory on top of Bitcoin Core using an offline computer to sign transactions. Once Trezor came along, then Nano S, most of us stopped using Armory. As bitcoin becomes more valuable there will be more losses due to operator error and bitcoin stealing malware.

Anyone with more than one bitcoin needs a hardware wallet. You don't have to buy gadgets like Cryptosteel to safe keep your 24 word seed, just get a credit card sized piece of aluminum and engrave your seed with a Dremel.

From the beginning it is a good idea to have a different wallet, it is safer to split your coin in a different places, and now because of the fee, it add another reasons why we need a different wallet, I think now is very important to have a wallet that able to set the fee transaction, some of the transaction got a high priority that need to be send immediately and as we know there are so many stuck transaction so without being able to set the transaction fee then our transaction will take a long time to confirmed

I disagree, you just need to use one wallet that gives you control and has flexibility  (for the purpose you mentioned) but educate yourself on how to use bitcoin.
for instance many are using electrum and that wallet gives you enough flexibility to change most of the things that are needed and if the user has educated himself then he knows what fees would be appropriate.

and I disagree with suggesting blockchain.info that wallet is bad, specially for beginners, for someone who is experienced that may work as a handy everywhere-accessible-wallet kind of thing.